I read or listened to a story a few years back ... it was talking about Bush ... or Obama... I'm sorry, I don't remember. It spoke of the office of the President and the stark contrast between being the most powerful person on the international stage while also being fairly weak on the domestic stage. It was interesting and made sense.

Nadie_AZ:I read or listened to a story a few years back ... it was talking about Bush ... or Obama... I'm sorry, I don't remember. It spoke of the office of the President and the stark contrast between being the most powerful person on the international stage while also being fairly weak on the domestic stage. It was interesting and made sense.

Well, you don't want a weak executive branch. The whole checks and balances thing, you know. And I think Rep Stewart put forth a clear case about how the current administration is violating the system of checks and balances

Now the power of the President over seas is only as good as his bluff. People have to believe that the Administration will back up words with actions. Right now it's been a mixed bag. The action in Libya went well, but that had the backing necessary to call it a NATO mission not just a US mission. Then on the other hand the all talk no action on Syria didn't help. And Putin was the one that pulled us out of that one. And now Putin is standing on the other side of this conflict.

Lionel Mandrake:Lucky LaRue: Lionel Mandrake: Lucky LaRue: I wouldn't call Obama weak, but he is making himself look like Putin's biatch every time he opens his mouth on the Ukraine topic.

What should he say or do?

Don't ask me; I'm no leader. He might do well to take his cues from people who actually have a political presence that foreign leaders respect, though.

Of course...you know what he's doing is wrong, but don't know what's right. As expected.

So, cues from what people specifically? Or is that more ass-talk?

It's obvious he is showing weakness in this particular political situation, just like he showed weakness on the Syria question. You would do better to face that problem rather than demand someone set up a strawman for you to knock over so that you feel better about your leader's questionable ability to command respect on the international stage.

The Stealth Hippopotamus:Nadie_AZ: I read or listened to a story a few years back ... it was talking about Bush ... or Obama... I'm sorry, I don't remember. It spoke of the office of the President and the stark contrast between being the most powerful person on the international stage while also being fairly weak on the domestic stage. It was interesting and made sense.

Well, you don't want a weak executive branch. The whole checks and balances thing, you know. And I think Rep Stewart put forth a clear case about how the current administration is violating the system of checks and balances

Rep. Stewart (D)

Now the power of the President over seas is only as good as his bluff. People have to believe that the Administration will back up words with actions. Right now it's been a mixed bag. The action in Libya went well, but that had the backing necessary to call it a NATO mission not just a US mission. Then on the other hand the all talk no action on Syria didn't help. And Putin was the one that pulled us out of that one. And now Putin is standing on the other side of this conflict.

Yes, historically the Executive has too much power. It has been a transition from the Legislative since the 80s.

Lucky LaRue:Lionel Mandrake: Lucky LaRue: Lionel Mandrake: Lucky LaRue: I wouldn't call Obama weak, but he is making himself look like Putin's biatch every time he opens his mouth on the Ukraine topic.

What should he say or do?

Don't ask me; I'm no leader. He might do well to take his cues from people who actually have a political presence that foreign leaders respect, though.

Of course...you know what he's doing is wrong, but don't know what's right. As expected.

So, cues from what people specifically? Or is that more ass-talk?

It's obvious he is showing weakness in this particular political situation, just like he showed weakness on the Syria question. You would do better to face that problem rather than demand someone set up a strawman for you to knock over so that you feel better about your leader's questionable ability to command respect on the international stage.

Hey, all I'm hearing is that what he's doing is wrong. Beyond saying he's playing marbles or not being decisive, is there anything more to be said? I can't say he's being weak if nobody can say what strong would be.

The Stealth Hippopotamus:Nadie_AZ: I read or listened to a story a few years back ... it was talking about Bush ... or Obama... I'm sorry, I don't remember. It spoke of the office of the President and the stark contrast between being the most powerful person on the international stage while also being fairly weak on the domestic stage. It was interesting and made sense.

Well, you don't want a weak executive branch. The whole checks and balances thing, you know. And I think Rep Stewart put forth a clear case about how the current administration is violating the system of checks and balances

Rep. Stewart (D)

Now the power of the President over seas is only as good as his bluff. People have to believe that the Administration will back up words with actions. Right now it's been a mixed bag. The action in Libya went well, but that had the backing necessary to call it a NATO mission not just a US mission. Then on the other hand the all talk no action on Syria didn't help. And Putin was the one that pulled us out of that one.

Considering that Syria is essentially a Russian client and in their sphere of influence, that was sort of HIS mess to clean up in the first place. Ukraine, is pretty much on the Russian side of things as well. Same as Georgians rolling tanks out against civilians in Ossetia. The entire world isn't the US backyard. There are places we have no real influence over. Likewise, coalitions are sort of important in international action.

I know that it's hard to believe, when you have a rage boner to do SOMETHING, but occasionally, it helps to think about things in more than just terms of the US. The sad thing? The US has been so active in meddling, and kicking over anthills, that the UN has sort of been lax about things, because the perception is, "If we just wait long enough, the US will take care of that, and then we can get about to making a profit on it."

It's sad yet hilarious to watch Giuliani puff out his chest and praise Putin like a proud father. You want a Decider? We had one of those. Every decision he made was wrong, but by god, he was decisive.

Mentat:It's sad yet hilarious to watch Giuliani puff out his chest and praise Putin like a proud father. You want a Decider? We had one of those. Every decision he made was wrong, but by god, he was decisive.

I think Maddow said something last night that when you go back to 2008, we had a "strong and decisive leader" and Putin still decided to mess with Georgia. This is more about Putin than it is the US.

vpb:RexTalionis: What's also funny is that I'm starting to hear people praising Putin because they think Putin is making Obama look bad.

He is practically one of them.

Pat Buchanan - "Is Vladimir Putin a paleoconservative? In the culture war for mankind's future, is he one of us?"

World Net Daily - The climate under Obama has gotten so bad, in fact, that Russian leader Vladimir Putin feels emboldened to claim for Russia the mantle of world moral leader - a proud distinction hitherto held by the good ol' USA.

The Daily Mail reports that, in his state of the nation address, "Putin sought to cast Russia as the moral arbiter of the world on Thursday, as he hit out at America's 'non-traditional values' and its influence across the world."

Austin Ruse, Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute - "You admire some of the things they're doing in Russia against [homosexual] propaganda. On the other hand, you know it would be impossible to do that here."

Lucky LaRue:It's obvious he is showing weakness in this particular political situation, just like he showed weakness on the Syria question. You would do better to face that problem rather than demand someone set up a strawman for you to knock over so that you feel better about your leader's questionable ability to command respect on the international stage.

So just what exactly do the Republicans propose we do with regard to Ukraine? Do they really think we should get involved militarily? They do remember what almost happened when the Soviet Union decided to get involved militarily in our own backyard, right?

hubiestubert:The Stealth Hippopotamus: Nadie_AZ: I read or listened to a story a few years back ... it was talking about Bush ... or Obama... I'm sorry, I don't remember. It spoke of the office of the President and the stark contrast between being the most powerful person on the international stage while also being fairly weak on the domestic stage. It was interesting and made sense.

Well, you don't want a weak executive branch. The whole checks and balances thing, you know. And I think Rep Stewart put forth a clear case about how the current administration is violating the system of checks and balances

Rep. Stewart (D)

Now the power of the President over seas is only as good as his bluff. People have to believe that the Administration will back up words with actions. Right now it's been a mixed bag. The action in Libya went well, but that had the backing necessary to call it a NATO mission not just a US mission. Then on the other hand the all talk no action on Syria didn't help. And Putin was the one that pulled us out of that one.

Considering that Syria is essentially a Russian client and in their sphere of influence, that was sort of HIS mess to clean up in the first place. Ukraine, is pretty much on the Russian side of things as well. Same as Georgians rolling tanks out against civilians in Ossetia. The entire world isn't the US backyard. There are places we have no real influence over. Likewise, coalitions are sort of important in international action.

I know that it's hard to believe, when you have a rage boner to do SOMETHING, but occasionally, it helps to think about things in more than just terms of the US. The sad thing? The US has been so active in meddling, and kicking over anthills, that the UN has sort of been lax about things, because the perception is, "If we just wait long enough, the US will take care of that, and then we can get about to making a profit on it."

Problem is, the UN Security Council won't ever agree on anything. Not when the primary offenders in the meddling sweepstakes are the US/UK, France, Russia, and China. You pretty much have to get a whacko who won't listen to anyone (e.g. the Taliban/Mullah Omar/bin Laden) to get those five to agree on anything.

Putin's exploiting any weakness in the various ex-USSR countries (e.g. giving passports to ethnic minorities, playing Armenia and Azerbaijan against each other, etc.)

I suspect he's lost the Baltics given their high degree of integration with NATO and the West (and the fact that they were all independent within living memory). But the others? He can make them his puppets -- and it matters more to him than to us.

In 1956, we had this discussion over Hungary. The desire to "do something to help those people who want freedom" balanced with the "wait a minute, this is in Russia's backyard and means more to them than to us." Now it's over Ukraine -- the Baltics and ex-Warsaw Pact countries are solidly part of the EU/West/civilized world/whatever you want to call it.

We can't let our reluctance to act (for whatever justifiable reason) whitewash what Putin's doing, though. Too many people seem to think our mistakes in Iraq and our overstaying in Afghanistan mean it's A-OK for Putin to do whatever.

In other words, Obama should use his imperial powers in situations we barely understand and on people we rarely think about unless something goes wrong, instead of trying to address our own problems or govern our own society.

The majority leader added: "I have spoken to administration officials to express our interest in working together to ensure that President Obama has the appropriate tools to impose real consequences on Russia for this aggression."